Modeling the commute mode share of transit using continuous accessibility to jobs

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

Volumn 74, Issue , 2015, Pages 110-122

  Owen, Andrew ^a   Levinson, David M ^a  

^a University of Minnesota   (United States)

Author keywords

Accessibility; Mode choice; Mode share; Modeling; Public transit

Indexed keywords

AGGREGATES; MODELS;

ACCESSIBILITY; AGGREGATE CHARACTERISTICS; DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS; MODE CHOICE; MODE SHARE; MODELING AND FORECASTING; PUBLIC TRANSIT; TRANSIT SYSTEMS;

CONTINUOUS TIME SYSTEMS;

ACCESSIBILITY; COMMUTING; JOURNEY TO WORK; MODELING; PUBLIC TRANSPORT; TRANSPORTATION MODE;

EID: 84924227985     PISSN: 09658564     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2015.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Anderson, P., Levinson, D.M., Parthasarathi, P., 2012. Using Twin Cities destinations and their accessibility as a multimodal planning tool. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
2. Anderson, P., Owen, A., Levinson, D., 2013. The time between: continuously-defined accessibility functions for scheduled transportation systems. In: 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board.
3. Beimborn E.A., Greenwald M.J., Jin X. Accessibility, connectivity, and captivity: impacts on transit choice. Transport. Res. Rec.: J. Transport. Res. Board 2003, 1835(1):1-9.
4. Benenson I., Martens K., Rofé Y. Measuring the gap between car and transit accessibility. Transport. Res. Rec.: J. Transport. Res. Board 2010, 2144(1):28-35.
5. Burnham K.P., Anderson D.R. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach 2002, Springer-Verlag. second ed.
6. Church R.L., Marston J.R. Measuring accessibility for people with a disability. Geogr. Anal. 2003, 35(1):83-96.
7. Dill, J., Schlossberg, M., Ma, L., Meyer, C., 2013. Predicting transit ridership at the stop level: the role of service and urban form. In: 92nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board.
8. El-Geneidy, A.M., Levinson, D.M., 2006. Access to destinations: development of accessibility measures. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
9. Fan Y., Guthrie A., Levinson D. Impact of light-rail implementation on labor market accessibility: a transportation equity perspective. J. Transport Land Use 2012, 5(3):28-39.
10. Geurs K.T., van Wee B. Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J. Transport Geography 2004, 12(2):127-140.
11. Google, Inc., 2013. Transit http://developers.google.com/transit/.
12. Graham, M.R., Kutzbach, M.J., McKenzie, B., 2014. Design comparison of LODES and ACS commuting data products. U.S. Census Bureau Center for Economic Studues, Working Paper CES-WP-14-38.
13. Hansen W. How accessibility shapes land use. J. Am. Inst. Planners 1959, 25(2):73-76.
14. Horner M.W. Spatial dimensions of urban commuting: a review of major issues and their implications for future geographic research. Prof. Geogr. 2004, 56(2):160-173.
15. Horner M.W., Murray A.T. Excess commuting and the modifiable areal unit problem. Urban Stud. 2002, 39(1):131-139.
16. Horner M.W., Schleith D. Analyzing temporal changes in land-use-transportation relationships: a LEHD-based approach. Appl. Geogr. 2012, 35(1-2):491-498.
17. Ingram D.R. The concept of accessibility: a search for an operational form. Regional Stud. 1971, 5(2):101-107.
18. Kawabata M. Job access and employment among low-skilled autoless workers in US metropolitan areas. Environ. Plann. A 2003, 35(9):1651-1668.
19. Kawabata M. Spatiotemporal dimensions of modal accessibility disparity in Boston and San Francisco. Environ. Plann. A 2009, 41(1):183.
20. Kawabata M., Shen Q. Commuting inequality between cars and public transit: the case of the San Francisco bay area, 1990-2000. Urban Stud. 2007, 44(9):1759.
21. Korkmaz, T., Kruntz, M., 2001. Multi-constrained optimal path selection. In: 20th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies 2, pp. 834-843.
22. Krizek, K.J., Iacono, M., El-Geneidy, A., Liao, C.-F., Johns, R., 2009. Access to destinations: application of accessibility measures for non-auto travel modes. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
23. Kuipers F., van Meighem P., Korkmaz T., Krunz M. An overview of constraint-based path selection algorithms for QoS routing. Commun. Mag., IEEE 2002, 40(12):50-55.
24. Lei T., Church R. Mapping transit-based access: integrating GIS, routes, and schedules. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2010, 24(2):283-304.
25. Levine J., Grengs J., Shen Q., Shen Q. Does accessibility require density or speed? A comparison of fast versus close in getting where you want to go in US metropolitan regions. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 2012, 78(2):157-172.
26. Mavoa S., Witten K., McCreanor T., O'Sullivan D. GIS based destination accessibility via public transit and walking in Auckland, New Zealand. J. Transport Geography 2012, 20(1):15-22.
27. McFadden D. Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior 1974, 105-142. Academic Press.
28. McFadden D. The measurement of urban travel demand. J. Public Econ. 1974, 3(4):303-328.
29. McFadden D., Johnson M., Reid F. Travel Demand Forecasting Study 1973, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California.
30. Menard S. Coefficients of determination for multiple logistic regression analysis. Am. Stat. 2000, 54(1):17-24.
31. Metropolitan Council, 2010. 2030 Transportation Policy Plan.
32. Morris J.M., Dumble P., Wigan M.R. Accessibility indicators for transport planning. Transport. Res. Part A 1979, 13(2):91-109.
33. Niedzielski M.A., Horner M.W., Xiao N. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Practice 2013, 58:129-143.
34. Owen, A., Levinson, D., 2012. Annual accessibility measure for the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Minnesota Department of Transportation.
35. Polzin S.E., Pendyala R.M., Navari S. Development of time-of-day-based transit accessibility analysis tool. Transport. Res. Rec.: J. Transport. Res. Board 2002, 1799(1):35-41.
36. Shen Q. Job accessibility as an indicator of auto-oriented urban structure: a comparison of Boston and Los Angeles with Tokyo. Environ. Plann. B: Plann. Des. 2006, 33:115-130.
37. Spear, B.D., 2011. Improving employment data for transportation planning. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
38. Taylor B.D., Miller D., Iseki H., Fink C. Nature and/or nurture? Analyzing the determinants of transit ridership across US urbanized areas. Transport. Res. Part A 2009, 43(1):60-77.
39. Tilahun N., Levinson D. Work and home location: possible role of social networks. Transport. Res. Part A 2011, 45(4):323-331.
40. Wang F., Xu Y. Estimating O-D travel time matrix by Google maps API: implementation, advantages, and implications. Ann. GIS 2011, 17(4):199-209.
41. Wu B.M., Hine J.P. A PTAL approach to measuring changes in bus service accessibility. Transport Policy 2003, 10(4):307-320.
42. Zhu, S., 2010. The roads taken: theory and evidence on route choice in the wake of the I-35W Mississippi River Bridge collapse and reconstruction. PhD thesis, University of Minnesota.